🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent effort to settle the conflict.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial attempts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a quick deal that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is working on either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials living in a dream world,” he continued. “It might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more stable footing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, securing a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a set of possible ideas for resolving this conflict based on input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the deal was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary made a call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for continuing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”